note
bojinlund
<blockquote><i>
So you're just taking BrowserUk's word for it?
</i></blockquote>
<p>No, but I do not have enough knowledge in the Windows operating system and the Perl implementation on it to make such a statement!</p>
<blockquote><i>
<p> Did you read [doc://perlport]#[doc://perlport#fork] yourself?</p>
</i></blockquote>
<p>Yes!</p>
<p>
In this patch [http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commitdiff/bee96257ad6e12bd0adacaeb3b40c32c5776b068?hp=2fbb14a0b50722f55cd2863203a1ea1a3c2133f7] I succeed to add some information on “Portability issues” to [doc://perlfunc]. In perlfunc there is now very short information on some security issues, a link to [doc://perlport] and in perlport a link to [doc://perlfork]
</p>
<p>
I have later realized that this is not enough. For me it is very difficult to interpret the consequence of the information in [doc://perlfork].
</p>
<p>
I would like, already in [doc://perlfunc], to have more straightforward statements like:
<blockquote>
“do not attempt to use fork & the windows signals emulation to try to port *nix idioms to windows; because you will be sadly let down”
</blockquote>
or
<blockquote>
“If you want to write cross-platform code, you shouldn't use signals, full stop.”
</blockquote>
(The statements should of course be polished. I hope somebody with English as native language could help out.)
</p>
1022364
1022864